Advertisement

Discrete Hardware Apparatus and Method for Mobile Application and Communication Security

  • Paschalis Papagrigoriou
  • Anargyros Plemenos
  • Ioannis G. Askoxylakis
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8533)

Abstract

With the dramatic shift of internet use away from desktop and laptop PCs toward smartphones and tablets, protection thresholds for application, device and communication security have significantly lowered. Most attempts on reversing this situation by means of converting standard mobile devices into tamper-proof equipment have proven to leave ample space for vulnerability of mobile processes and communication content. The only high efficacy method of sheltering against spying and fraud is seen in a new approach where a dedicated piece of discrete hardware is tasked with all security related operations while the standard cell phone or tablet remains unchanged, providing only its connectivity capabilities. The increasing cost caused by e.g. fraud in the area of mobile banking provides the background to economically justify this effort, which can in parallel support many other areas of mobile security.

Keywords

Mobile internet security espionage fraud hardware 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Andrejevic, M.: Facebook als neue Produktionsweise. In: Leistert, O., Rohle, T. (eds.) Generation Facebook: Uber das leben im social net, pp. 31–49 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhou, Y., Wang, Z., Zhou, W., Jiang, X.: Hey, you, get off of my market: Detecting malicious apps in official and alternative android markets. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Network and Distributed System Security Symposium, pp. 5–8 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Suarez-Tangil, G., Tapiador, J.E., Peris-Lopez, P., Ribagorda, A.: Evolution, Detection and Analysis of Malware for Smart Devices. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 1–27 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Frick, J., Rainer, B.: Method for identifying a mobile phone user or for eavesdropping on outgoing calls. Patent: EP1051053Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Texas Criminal Lawyer Blog. Devices that Track Cell Phone Signals Violate Fourth Amendment, Say Privacy Advocates (2013), https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/200455/bis-13-p184-2013-information-security-breaches-survey-technical-report.pdf
  6. 6.
    Andriotis, P., Oikonomou, G., Tryfonas, T.: Forensic Analysis of Wireless Networking Evidence of Android Smartphones. In: Proc. IEEE International Workshop on Information Forensics and Security (WIFS 2012), Tenerife, Spain, pp. 109–114. IEEE (December 2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Internet Service Providers. Guiding Principles on Cyber Security. Guidance for Internet Service Providers and Government (December 2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Andriotis, P., Tryfonas, T., Oikonomou, G., Yildiz, C.: A pilot study on the security of pattern screen-lock methods and soft side channel attacks. In: Proc. 6th ACM Conference on Security and Privacy in Wireless and Mobile Networks (WiSec 2013), pp. 1–6. ACM Press (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Petroulakis, N.E., Tragos, E.Z., Fragkiadakis, A.G., Spanoudakis, G.: A lightweight framework for secure life-logging in smart environments. Information Security Technical Report 17(3), 58–70 (2013); Security and Privacy for Digital EcosystemsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Department for Business Innovation and Skills. Information Security Breaches Survey (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Secocard. The security Platform, http://www.secocard.ch
  12. 12.
    EMPELOR GmbH, http://www.empelor.ch
  13. 13.
    Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K., Mayes, K.: Coopetitive Architecture to Support a Dynamic and Scalable NFC based Mobile Services Architecture. In: Chim, T.W., Yuen, T.H. (eds.) ICICS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7618, pp. 214–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K.: Smart Cards: State-of-the-Art to Future Directions. In: IEEE International Symposium on Signal Processing and Information Technology (ISSPIT 2013) (December 2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Akram, R.N., Markantonakis, K., Mayes, K.: User Centric Security Model for Tamper-Resistant Devices. In: 8th IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE 2011). IEEE Computer Society (October 2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petroulakis, N.E., Askoxylakis, I.G., Traganitis, A., Spanoudakis, G.: A privacy-level model of user-centric cyber-physical systems. In: Marinos, L., Askoxylakis, I. (eds.) HAS 2013. LNCS, vol. 8030, pp. 338–347. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    E-Banking Snapshot 39. Deutsche Bank Research (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Courtois, N.T.: Computer Security at the Low, Hardware/Process/Memory Level. University College London (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leibholz, S.W., Frankel, C.T.L.: Tracking Inappropriate Data Exfiltration: Dealing with the Ubiquitous Insider Threat via Zero-Knowledge Proof (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paschalis Papagrigoriou
    • 1
  • Anargyros Plemenos
    • 1
  • Ioannis G. Askoxylakis
    • 2
  1. 1.EMPELOR GmbHZugSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute of Computer ScienceFoundation for Research and Technology - HellasHeraklionGreece

Personalised recommendations